Incorrect prognosis due to lack of location research
On 21 March 2018, the District Court of The Hague ruled, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:3348, that a franchisor’s forecast was unsound, as a result of which the franchisee had erred and the franchisor had acted unlawfully.
Contrary to what was stated in the franchise agreement, the franchisor had not conducted a location survey. Nor had the franchisor conducted any research among its own franchisees. The franchisor has acknowledged that it only used historical turnover and profit data (annual figures) of two stores when drawing up the forecasts. Furthermore, the franchisor had not sufficiently disputed that the aforementioned two stores differed substantially in terms of retail space, location and product range.
The predictive value of (merely) historical turnover and profit data is relative, especially now that the franchisor determines both the purchase prices and the sales prices of its franchisees in accordance with its franchise formula, according to the court.
The operating results turn out to be considerably lower than forecast. The court considers that the franchisor must, in principle, guarantee the soundness of the operating forecasts (prepared by itself) that it had provided to the franchisee. After all, the franchisee could assume that it could rely on the information provided by the franchisor, because a large franchisor, such as in the present case, with more than a hundred franchised pet specialty shops in the Netherlands, can be pre-eminently considered to be aware of all market conditions relevant to the potential turnover of the VOF, and on the basis thereof be able to make realistic estimates of the turnover opportunities arising from those circumstances.
On the basis of the foregoing, the court is therefore of the opinion that the operating forecasts drawn up by the franchisor are unsound and that the franchise agreement was concluded under the influence of error as a result of errors in the operating forecast provided by the franchisor.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl .
Other messages
Judge: Protect franchisee against supermarket organization (Coop) as lessor
Does the franchisee need legal protection from supermarket franchisor Coop? The District Court of Rotterdam ruled on 9 February 2018, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:1151, that this is the case.
Acquisition fraud vs. error in franchise forecasting
Who has to prove that the franchisor's forecast is unsound? In principle, this is the franchisee. If the franchisee invokes the Acquisition Fraud Act, it may be that
Obligation to sell back at the end of the franchise agreement
Franchise agreements sometimes provide that the franchisee is required to sell back purchased assets at the end of the franchise agreement.
Supermarket letter – 20
Uncertain legal position of Emté franchisees
Position of franchisees in franchisor restructuring
Franchisees must be adequately and generously informed in advance by the franchisor about the content and consequences of (further) agreements...
Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal of burden of proof in forecasts approved by court” – February 2018
The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+. Alex Dolphijn of Ludwig & Van Dam assists a franchisee in a